[calpurnpiso]

nkb wrote

Wow, that bust doesn't look anything like Nero.

He actually looked a lot like Peter Ustinov (fat, with a beard). I know this is accurate, because I saw it in a movie (Quo Vadis). :D

Yes. It is amazing that there was actually research on how Nero looked like!...it was the ONLY historically accurate thing in the whole movie. I was 13 when I first saw the movie..I love it..I used to play Nero laying on the couch wearing a white sheet, have the servants bring me grapes and call me divinity!..:lol:.......when my parents were not at home...

Nero's undoing was his inability to keep a balance between the political manipulations of the senate, the pretorians under Tigellinus, the nobility ( optimates) the blebes ( popularis) and the priests ( flamines)...then he decided to recklessly perform in theaters as an actor, charioteer. This infuriated the upper class since Nero was viewed as a god by the populace. These activities disrobed him of his divinity.

The problem was that Nero was an atheist ( stoic
-Epicurean) who was under the tutelage of the stoic philosopher Seneca, and lost control of the minds of the people.

Christian COPIED Seneca's wise morals precepts and as usual CLAIM them their own 250 years later, during the mutation of CODI ( Cult of Divus Iulius) to Christianity.

Here are is an excerpt from Seneca's of the Tranquility of MIND in Latin, those who know LAtin can make some interesting observations in the translation:

" 4. studiorum quoque quae liberalissima impensa est tam diu rationem habet, quam diu modum. quo innumerabiles libros et bybliothecas, quarum dominus vix tota vita indices perlegit? onerat discentem turba, non instruit, multoque satius est paucis te auctoribus tradere, quam errare per multos. 5. quadraginta milia librorum Alexandriae arserunt; pulcherrimum regiae opulentiae monimentum alius laudaverit, sicut T. Livius, qui elegantiae regum curaeque egregium id opus ait fuisse. non fuit elegantia illud aut cura, sed studiosa luxuria, immo ne studiosa quidem, quoniam non in studium sed in spectaculum comparaverant, sicut plerisque ignaris etiam puerilium litterarum libri non studiorum instrumenta sed cenationum ornamenta sunt. paretur itaque librorum quantum satis sit, nihil in apparstum. 6. 'honestius,' inquis 'hoc se impensae quam in Corinthia pictasque tabulas effuderint.' vitiosum est ubique, quod nimium est. quid habes, cur ignoscas homini armaria e citro atque ebore captanti, corpora conquirenti aut ignotorum auctorum aut improbatorum et inter tot milia librorum oscitanti, cui voluminum suorum frontes maxime placent titulique? 7. apud desidiosissimos ergo videbis quicquid orationum historiarumque est, tecto tenus exstructa loculamenta; iam enim inter balnearia et thermas bybliotheca quoque ut necessarium domus ornamentum expolitur. ignoscerem plane, si studiorum nimia cupidine erraretur. nunc ista conquisita, cum imaginibus suis discripta sacrorum opera ingeniorum in speciem et cultum parietum comparantur. "

This English translation misses important points IMHO:

" 4- Even for studies, where expenditure is most honourable, it is justifiable only so long as it is kept within bounds. What is the use of having countless books and libraries, whose titles their owners can scarcely read through in a whole lifetime? The learner is, not instructed, but burdened by the mass of them, and it is much better to surrender yourself to a few authors than to wander through many. 5. Forty thousand books were burned at Alexandria; let someone else praise this library as the most noble monument to the wealth of kings, as did Titus Livius, who says that it was the most distinguished achievement of the good taste and solicitude of kings. There was no 'good taste' or 'solicitude' about it, but only learned luxury -- nay, not even 'learned,' since they had collected the books, not for the sake of learning, but to make a show, just as many who lack even a child's knowledge of letters use books, not as the tools of learning, but as decorations for the dining-room. Therefore, let just as many books be acquired as are enough, but none for mere show. 6. 'It is more respectable,' you say, 'to squander money on these than on Corinthian bronzes and on pictures.' But excess in anything becomes a fault. What excuse have you to offer for a man who seeks to have bookcases of citrus-wood and ivory, who collects the works of unknown or discredited authors and sits yawning in the midst of so many thousand books, who gets most of his pleasure from the outsides of volumes and their titles? 7. Consequently it is in the houses of the laziest men that you will see a full collection of orations and history with the boxes piled right up to the ceiling; for by now among cold baths and hot baths a library also is equipped as a necessary ornament of a great house. I would readily pardon these men if they were led astray by their excessive zeal for learning. But as it is, these collections of the works of sacred genius with all the portraits that adorn them are bought for show and a decoration of their walls. "

Here is Senecas book: " Stoic Philosophy of Seneca Essays and Letters "

A commentary:

"The Good Book, November 17, 2004
Seneca's one hundred and twenty four letters to Lucilius constitute a secular bible, an ethical catechism written in a gnomic and epigrammatic style that sparkles as it enlightens. So impressed were the early church fathers with Seneca's moral insights that they advanced (fabricated?) the speculation that he must have come within the influence of Christian teachings. T.S. Eliot sneers at Seneca's boyish, commonplace wisdom and points out that the resemblances between Seneca's 'stoic philosophy' and Christianity are superficial. For those seeking a practical, modern manual on how to do good and how to do well, written in the 'silver point' style that values brevity, concision and memorable expression, Seneca's letters are indeed the Good Book. "

It is called a "Secular Bible". I believe the despicable Christian plagiarists STOLE, as usual, many of his moral teachings...made Nero a Monster...made themselves the victims been thrown to lions..place themselves in the 1st Century when the HISTORICAL truth is that Christianity did NOT exists at the time, unless by Christians we are referring to the PIOUS FOLLOWERS of the Divus Iulius cult or #1 Religion of the EMpire.. This is very easy to do by merely changing few letter to the name of the Archiereus Megistus (head priest) or anointed Archiereus aka Christos. EVERYTHING mutates with time. Didn't The COMET of CAESAR ( Sidus Iulius) which represented the SOUL of the SAVIOUR Caesar who had ASCENDED to heaven after his blood sacrifice, mutated into the Chi-Ro or Christ INITIALS which the Catholic church uses today? this in itself is CLEAR evidence Caesar a GOD mutated with the passing of three centuries into the Christ worshiped today! Alas, COINS do not lie!